Mercedes-AMG 2012 W03 - Part II

It seems like the Mercedes with it's finicky suspension design would certainly profit from a wider tyre working range. With the downwash exhaust integrated from day 1 the effect of the bigger fuelload should arguably be better manageable. And last but not least they should have got a lot of insight into the Fric-suspension, maybe they can iron out the problems in this area.

I'd say Mercedes (or rather the team based in Brackley in all it's guises) has always suffered from a poor understanding of tyres. They had a good year in 2004 when they changed to Michelins which looked to be a bit of fluke, their car seemed to suit the 2004 Michelin tyre. In 2009 they designed the car around the double diffuser that gave them a lot more downforce than other teams, even then they still had tyre issues with Button often complaining he was struggling for balance.
Since then the team has really struggled to get on top of the tyres. The fancy suspension might be part of it but that's only been on the car for a year or two so I think it's something more fundamental.

I'd say Mercedes (or rather the team based in Brackley in all it's guises) has always suffered from a poor understanding of tyres. They had a good year in 2004 when they changed to Michelins which looked to be a bit of fluke, their car seemed to suit the 2004 Michelin tyre. In 2009 they designed the car around the double diffuser that gave them a lot more downforce than other teams, even then they still had tyre issues with Button often complaining he was struggling for balance. Since then the team has really struggled to get on top of the tyres. The fancy suspension might be part of it but that's only been on the car for a year or two so I think it's something more fundamental.

i don't think thats due to the car, he always has balance issues in every car he's driven. but u may be right about bAR/Honda/mercedes.

Say what you like, but if this was so easy then where are Rosberg's multiple championships in the W01-03 series ?

If it is based on the premise that Webber is an utterly hopeless hack, and as young Vettel is only significantly faster than Webber when the car is setup suitably to use Vettel's special corner entry trick (which is most of the time actually..) thus therefore they are both rubbish drivers... that is a very interesting opinion!

If it is based on the premise that Webber is an utterly hopeless hack, and as young Vettel is only significantly faster than Webber when the car is setup suitably to use Vettel's special corner entry trick (which is most of the time actually..) thus therefore they are both rubbish drivers... that is a very interesting opinion!

can you tell me whats his driving style?

I know about Alonso's - he puts the car in corner, straightens out then catches the car. this is what the Indian TV commentators say.

in which way does Haug's departure will affect the team?he has obviously played a major part in making the Merc engines to be the most sought after & default fastest. to make it worse, this is a very crucial time for 2014 engine development cycle.

in which way does Haug's departure will affect the team?he has obviously played a major part in making the Merc engines to be the most sought after & default fastest. to make it worse, this is a very crucial time for 2014 engine development cycle.

i think Merc made another mistake by firing the wrong guy

Since you are so sure that Haug was dismissed (as opposed to resigned from his own initiative), perhaps you can also tell us something about that meeting, because I am quite sure that not too many people are privy to Minutes of the Meeting with Haug in a hot seat, explaining to the Board season that could have been, but never was.

Having said that, we all know that Norbert is a sport enthusiast, he is a transplant journalist (that was news to me), and he is not Jean Todt, a professional manager, which perhaps a team needs right now.

Since you are so sure that Haug was dismissed (as opposed to resigned from his own initiative), perhaps you can also tell us something about that meeting, because I am quite sure that not too many people are privy to Minutes of the Meeting with Haug in a hot seat, explaining to the Board season that could have been, but never was.

Having said that, we all know that Norbert is a sport enthusiast, he is a transplant journalist (that was news to me), and he is not Jean Todt, a professional manager, which perhaps a team needs right now.

i dont understand why most of the members here take everything SO seriously.loosen a bit people.

btw, it was just a joke, to make it more obvious, a smiley was put at the end.

Here is something that should give some insight to the 'too many cooks' theorists. This has been discussed somewhat already here, but what Gillan is saying just about explains and justifies the structure that has been set up at Merc. It could pay off handsomely. They are not jeopardizing 2013, and can fully concentrate on 2014 since months now simultaneously. Takes some serious project management I assume though. LH has made a more calculated decision than the likes of Warwick try to make him out to have made.

Here is something that should give some insight to the 'too many cooks' theorists. This has been discussed somewhat already here, but what Gillan is saying just about explains and justifies the structure that has been set up at Merc. It could pay off handsomely. They are not jeopardizing 2013, and can fully concentrate on 2014 since months now simultaneously. Takes some serious project management I assume though. LH has made a more calculated decision than the likes of Warwick try to make him out to have made.

That is all nice, but the fact is that Mercedes is in the weakest position of practically all teams for the 2014 car. They have no baseline to work from, not on the mechanical side, not on the aerodynamic side. Their understanding of the tires has been limited by the faulty suspension for 3 seasons now. It is possible that a re-design means that all data gathered prior to 2013 might be worthless for 2014. For me as an engineer it is a bad thing to work on 2 new projects, with having no safe development baseline to start from.

Mercedes uses simulator from Cruden? Is it similar to the one used by Lotus?

I believe the Lotus simulator uses a McLaren design on the hardware side and their own software. The new Mercedes one is reputedly more advanced in terms of hardware than any other in F1, but who knows whose software brings more benefit.

That is all nice, but the fact is that Mercedes is in the weakest position of practically all teams for the 2014 car. They have no baseline to work from, not on the mechanical side, not on the aerodynamic side. Their understanding of the tires has been limited by the faulty suspension for 3 seasons now. It is possible that a re-design means that all data gathered prior to 2013 might be worthless for 2014. For me as an engineer it is a bad thing to work on 2 new projects, with having no safe development baseline to start from.

Yes. I think you should give them a call, and tell them to give it up now, before they pump more money into the trash bin. All is lost. I don't really know what you are trying to say here. No head, no tails.

Yes. I think you should give them a call, and tell them to give it up now, before they pump more money into the trash bin. All is lost. I don't really know what you are trying to say here. No head, no tails.

I understand your previous post as saying that their structure gives them an advantage, which I do not agree with. While the manpower allows them to work on 2 cars at the same time with more ease than smaller teams, both workgroups still suffer from a lack of reliable data to base their development on and certainly they will have to make sure that the flow of information between the two project groups goes very well, because knowledge gained on the 2013 needs to be used for the 2014 car. Which means even if they have 2 independend work groups, the projects are still closely linked, and the 2014 project depends on the results of the 2013. Worst case would be that the 2013 car again fails to handle the tires, which means that the 2014 group will have a lot of guessing to do.

Ferrari or RBR on the other hand can use their 2011/2012 data to work on the 2013 and 2014 cars. And while the projects are linked, they have the advantage that a wrong decision for 2013 would effect 2014 in a lesser way, because they have the basic data from 2012. So even if they make a huge blunder for 2013 there is a working baseline spec to go back to, in case the 2013 turns out to be a dog after the first races. Mercedes would be in bigger trouble if the 2013 car turns out to be a dog.

I understand your previous post as saying that their structure gives them an advantage, which I do not agree with. While the manpower allows them to work on 2 cars at the same time with more ease than smaller teams, both workgroups still suffer from a lack of reliable data to base their development on and certainly they will have to make sure that the flow of information between the two project groups goes very well, because knowledge gained on the 2013 needs to be used for the 2014 car. Which means even if they have 2 independend work groups, the projects are still closely linked, and the 2014 project depends on the results of the 2013. Worst case would be that the 2013 car again fails to handle the tires, which means that the 2014 group will have a lot of guessing to do.

Ferrari or RBR on the other hand can use their 2011/2012 data to work on the 2013 and 2014 cars. And while the projects are linked, they have the advantage that a wrong decision for 2013 would effect 2014 in a lesser way, because they have the basic data from 2012. So even if they make a huge blunder for 2013 there is a working baseline spec to go back to, in case the 2013 turns out to be a dog after the first races. Mercedes would be in bigger trouble if the 2013 car turns out to be a dog.

Yeah I got what you are trying to say the first time too,, but you were wrong and you are completely wrong now. Ferrari 2011/12? Ferrari dumped their design from 2011, and came up with a new one for 2012. Furthermore, their new design was re-designed during the season, and was still slower by 0,5-0,7s by the end of the season. Their wind-tunnel sucked, and because of that their sim sucked too. So what reliable data are you exactly talking about? Not one of their upgrades worked in the last third of this season. What baseline for 2014?? Everyone is designing from scratch for 2014 for god's sake, there is a near-complete reg and design shake-up after next season. New engines, new power trains, new Kers, totally new packaging. Why in the hell would they need 2012/13 data to start design work on that?? Furthermore, what is 'reliable' data? Data is data. If a car is slow, and the design team understands why it is slow, than the data collected is invaluable. There is false data though. Like in the case of Ferrari. That is why they used the Toyota windtunnel. The fact is, Merc does have an advantage with the new structure. They have the staff, they have more than 1 windtunnel, one completely new, and they have the new engine in-house. Only Ferrari is a in a similar position, No-one else. Gillan has said the same, basically. Have you even read that article???

"There are areas of this car over the winter which we need to improve and want to improve for next season but you've also got to balance 2014 on the horizon," Gillan told AUTOSPORT.

"That's a very important season and the resource you've got forwhat's relevant for 2014 and what's only relevant for 2013.

You concentrate on the aerdynamic side of things, I think about the mechnical side and the tires. Ferrari did ok with the tires in 2011, they did ok in 2012, even if they go down a wrong path in 2013, they always can revert back to a previous desgin solution for 2014. Mercedes on the other has so far completely failed to make the tires work. Hopefully they have found the reason and will fix the problem in 2013, but if they do not, the design for the 2014 car has a huge problem (unkown factor) to it.

For me the strongest position lies with RBR. They have the resources, a strong baseline of design and data and surely will be as well informed about the 2014 package as Mercedes and Ferrari. Ferrari has a problem "just" on the aero side. Which they could fix with the use of the Toyota windtunnel and by re-building their own.
Mercedes on the other hand seems to have had aero problems (their up-grades did not shine either) and mechnical problems (tires do not work), so I still think they are surely not enjoying any advantage for 2013 or 2014. That does not mean they can not be comeptitve though. It just means they have the most work to do.

You concentrate on the aerdynamic side of things, I think about the mechnical side and the tires. Ferrari did ok with the tires in 2011, they did ok in 2012, even if they go down a wrong path in 2013, they always can revert back to a previous desgin solution for 2014. Mercedes on the other had so far completely failed to make the tires work. Hopefully they have found the reason and will fix the problem in 2013, but if they do not the design for the 2014 car has a huge problem (unkown factor) to it.

For me the strognest position lies with RBR. They have the resources, a strong baselinge of design and data and surely will be as well infromed about the 2014 package as Mercedes and Ferrari. Ferrari has a problem "just" on the aero side. Which they could fix with the use of the Toyota windtunnel and buy re-building their own. Mercedes on the other hand seems to have had aero problems (their up-grades did not shine either) and mechnical problems (tires do not work), so I still think they are surely not enjoying any advantage for 2013 or 2014. That does not mean they can not be comeptitve though. It just means they have to most work to do.

I am not concentrating on the aero side, or to that matter, any specifics at all. You are stating the obvious, though. Of course RBR is in the strongest position. So is McLaren. As it has been said, it is going to be pretty hard to make a step forward in the current pecking order, the regs are basically unchanged, and an evo design on a contenders car is a piece of cake, so to speak. Ferrari has to find 5-7 tenths at least as a baseline to improve on further, with an evo design. Lotus some more. For RBR, whatever they find in laptime is a bonus. McLaren were faster than Red Bull. If they iron out their reliabilty, Red Bull will be looking at the rear wing of Perez's car a lot in 2013. (or not) Merc has, as I said, basically been testing for the next car from mid-season, They quite possibly will come out with a fresh design, since the design team that was responsible for the W03 is no more As to making the tyres work, you need to factor in the 2013 Pirellis, with all their shitty attributes, coupled with a highly complex, unique suspension, which basically heated the 4 tyres on the car to four differing temperatures depending on the type of track they ran on. This is something that may be a nonexistent problem next year, if Pirelli lives up to its promise of broadening the operating window next year. That is what all the teams wanted too. Plus, the tyre problems were also related to aero inefficiency of course and furthermore,tyre wear per se was not the problem anymore by the end of the season. So Mercedes has a mountain to climb, for sure. All in all, bringing us back to the original topic, the structure set in place by Merc, could pay off handsomely, because they have everything in place to turn the corner, and some more. Their resources enable them to work on the 2014 design, without jeopardizing a possibly much better 2013. As to what data they rely on to do that: It seems to me that they have done nothing else than collect data for months, they were basically testing for half the season during races. You seem to believe that data collected with a weak car is worthless. I beg to differ. If they will be succesful at turning the corner or not? Well, I don't know, of course. what I am saying though, is that they have made it possible for themselves. The rest is up to brainpower and management.

Haug rated their in-season development as somewhere between bad and very bad (BILD)

Right, and that's because of..? Fans have done their share of speculation, Haug touched lightly on one or two reasons, but I wonder when someone else on F1 team will come out and confess (although I doubt it).

You concentrate on the aerdynamic side of things, I think about the mechnical side and the tires. Ferrari did ok with the tires in 2011, they did ok in 2012, even if they go down a wrong path in 2013, they always can revert back to a previous desgin solution for 2014. Mercedes on the other has so far completely failed to make the tires work. Hopefully they have found the reason and will fix the problem in 2013, but if they do not, the design for the 2014 car has a huge problem (unkown factor) to it.

For me the strongest position lies with RBR. They have the resources, a strong baseline of design and data and surely will be as well informed about the 2014 package as Mercedes and Ferrari. Ferrari has a problem "just" on the aero side. Which they could fix with the use of the Toyota windtunnel and by re-building their own. Mercedes on the other hand seems to have had aero problems (their up-grades did not shine either) and mechnical problems (tires do not work), so I still think they are surely not enjoying any advantage for 2013 or 2014. That does not mean they can not be comeptitve though. It just means they have the most work to do.

I beg to differ. If they will be succesful at turning the corner or not? Well, I don't know, of course. what I am saying though, is that they have made it possible for themselves. The rest is up to brainpower and management.

Naturally the fans are concerned as they did not turn the corner at all in 2011 or 2012. To fear a repeat of Toyota-itis is only natural. Toyota was quite innovate and had many good developments that worked, actually, yet nothing to show.

The Mercedes team faces the double task of fixing lack of understanding, to be moving in positive direction and closing down the large lead of top teams too.

Even the definitely competent Newey-lead design team could only win one race for not even Red Bull but only the more powerful Toro Rosso car in pre-2009 development race, the lead of top line team was far too large, even with a fully competent 3xWCC design squad.

Naturally the fans are concerned as they did not turn the corner at all in 2011 or 2012. To fear a repeat of Toyota-itis is only natural. Toyota was quite innovate and had many good developments that worked, actually, yet nothing to show.

The Mercedes team faces the double task of fixing lack of understanding, to be moving in positive direction and closing down the large lead of top teams too.

Even the definitely competent Newey-lead design team could only win one race for not even Red Bull but only the more powerful Toro Rosso car in pre-2009 development race, the lead of top line team was far too large, even with a fully competent 3xWCC design squad.

Not sure what you mean with the 'lack of understanding' part. Its such a common misconception, and a trite expression also. Its going to be pretty hard to make a step forward though, I agree. But its not an impossible task.